Thunder drop their third straight, 103-98 to the Pacers

For the first time in 404 days, the Thunder have lost three straight games in the regular season.

And for the first time this season, they’re in second place in the Western Conference.

It would be easy to focus on the valiant comeback that had the Thunder within four with 30 seconds left and a chance. It would be easy to talk about KD’s 44 points or Russell Westbrook’s near triple-double.

But that would be ignoring an atrocious 35 minutes of basketball that put Oklahoma City in that position. Unfocused, flat defense. Sloppy, inattentive offense. Missed free throws, turnovers, offensive rebounds — it all went wrong. The 13-3 run to close the third and the fact OKC took Indiana’s 22-point lead to five with 1:08 left was better than them just mailing it in. But it doesn’t make up for the effort over the first three quarters of the game.

It was the kind of game that with around four minutes left in the third, you started looking around for something else to watch. That’s not normally something that happens with the Thunder.

In all honesty, I think we just saw the Heat beat the Thunder twice. So much was put into that game — effort, energy, focus, emotion — and the fact OKC came up short combined with the physicality of it likely carried over to Indiana. I don’t think there’s any explanation other than that as to why the Thunder looked so disinterested early on. Of course the Pacers deserve a lot of credit as they’re a really good team, but the Thunder shouldn’t play like THAT, much less against anyone.

(The Heat got walloped by the Grizzlies tonight too. Coincidence?)

The Thunder pushed hard to give themselves a shot, but never could break the 10-point barrier. OKC got it to 10 six different times in the fourth before finally busting through to cut it to eight with 1:40 left on a Westbrook layup. It just felt like if the Thunder could get under that double-digit barricade, they’d have a chance. Scott Brooks went to an effective smallball lineup probably a little too late, but it sparked a run. Westbrook’s hustle and effort was inspiring and Durant was outstanding in the second half scoring 28 of his 44 after the break. Outside of that, OKC didn’t get much. James Harden scored only 10 points on 1-of-5 shooting, the Thunder bench put up only 18 total points and starters other than KD and Westbrook had 15 combined points. That’s not going to cut it.

Brooks mentioned is postgame that the smallball lineup does struggle with rebounding and that was essentially what doomed it. The Pacers had a +10 edge on the glass and finished with 18 offensive boards. While OKC had mismatches and a wicked transition game working to build a comeback, the little things like getting stops and rebounds were what did them in. But that’s a pick-your-poison thing.

Now the Thunder are in a tough spot. They’re tied with the Spurs (but behind because San Antonio owns the tiebreaker) and have to hope for some Spurs losses and better play from themselves to claim the top seed. There’s lots of time left, but a three-game losing streak at this point of the season isn’t preferred. Still, it’s not that distressing to me, because the Thunder proved a week ago they’re worthy of their contender title. Teams can see the playoffs on the horizon and sometimes, focus becomes an issue. The Mavs lost five straight in March last season. Obviously you hate to see a late season swoon create bad habits and cost things like a top seed, but a three game losing streak isn’t the end of the world.

The Thunder are fine. Why? Because they have the Raptors at home on Sunday. If things go bad there, then I think we might need to have a long sitdown discussion about this.

NOTES:

Little things in this game were just backbreaking. For instance, the Thunder had it to 10 with seven minutes left, almost came up with a steal but instead the ball found its way to Leandro Barbosa in the corner for an open 3, which he hit. That kind of stuff can’t happen in a comeback attempt.

Despite the loss, KD was absolutely fantastic. He had 44 on 24 shots, made big plays and big shots. If he had two more minutes, the Thunder were winning this game.

Westbrook never quit, even when the Thunder were down 20. He was running wild, trying to rebound every miss, going after every pass — it was contagious. That type of effort is something that can get teammates going and I think it did.

OKC lost, but KD’s dunk was pretty sick.

Westbrook struggled shooting again (7-of-23), but he turned it over only three times and was an assist away from a triple-double. And again, his effort was outstanding.

Not going to lie, for a good part of the game, the officiating was horrific. It leveled out in the fourth quarter as OKC attacked relentlessly and got a bunch of whistles, but there were some very iffy calls, including what would’ve been a big and-1 by Harden that turned out to be a terrible charge call.

Harden does not do a good job closing out shooters. A lot of his contests are half-hearted with him just sort of raising a hand on the shot. He doesn’t challenge shooters. He sags off just a bit too much and doesn’t recover. In OKC’s comeback, he was late closing out on Danny Granger and George Hill a couple times, which were costly.

Perk is often just a tad bit overeager to throw an outlet pass. I think rule No. 1 of throwing a proper outlet is that there needs to be a teammate ahead of you. Rule No. 2 is that he shouldn’t have three defenders around him.

So Derek Fisher played 27 minutes. Brooks was going small, which is why he did had that much time, but here’s my question: Why not Daequan Cook? Maybe he wasn’t completely ready to play 20 minutes, but just four minutes? Especially when Cook is a good rebounder at his position and can obviously hit some 3s? I don’t get that.

You know… Fisher was a +12 though. But that’s why game-by-game plus/minus numbers can be deceiving. Fisher just had the benefit of being on the floor during the big comeback and not on it when the Thunder dropped behind by a lot.

Tyler Hansbrough. Sigh.

Harden’s last five games: 11.2 points per game on 17-43 (39.5 percent) shooting. The Thunder are 2-3 in those games. I don’t think that’s a coincidence.

I think about 60 percent of getting a charge call is yelling.

Tonight’s text question was “What player has played the most games over the last nine seasons?” Oddly specific question, no? Well, wouldn’t you know it, Derek Fisher is third on that list. What a coincidence! I wonder what astute viewer sent in that incredibly super specific coincidental question.

The way the Thunder are built, we are the most flexible team in the league. We can make lineups that are specifically designed to play fast, slow, big, small, offensive, defensive, athletic or IQ. There is no other team in the league who has this capability. Every other team has an identity and they have to play that way. This makes them susceptible to bad matchups. This amazing flexibility puts a lot of onus onto the coach, he's got to find the correct lineups and strategy to play into the matchup problems of the opponent. Time after time, Brooks has shown an inability to do this. Last year in the Dallas series, he's starting Sefolosha on Stevenson. Stevenson is not an offensive threat, period so Sefolosha gains you nothing. Why not adjust the starting lineup to get Sefolosha minutes on Terry? It made no sense. And in the finals, Carlisle showed his level of coaching by moving Barea into the starting lineup against the Heat and this proved to be the turning point in the series. Logic is used in problem solving. He's showing that he struggles at problem solving. I'm sorry, Brooks lovers, he's not getting it done. He's driving a Ferrari so don't give me he's 40-14. This is the best roster in the league, anyone could be 40-14 with this team. A good coach could be 45-9 with this team.

of topic.Next season I think Harden will be starter,so we need scoring from bench.And I think Sonny Weems would be great.He can play sg,sf,he played in Euroleague(Kauno Zalgiris),he said he learn a lot,but he is injured right now,and the contract with Zalgiris have been cancelled,and he would like to come back to NBA.

Blame whoever for the loss, but its better to get this bug out of our system now then in the middle of the playoffs. I could care less if we lose the next two if it meant we won two more in the playoffs.

Fisher only averaged 26 minutes as a starter on a team that had a reason to be loyal to him and no one better to play instead of him. Yet he averages 20 on this team....that's all kinds of wrong. All he's doing is missing open 3s and he's stealing the minutes of a guy who's specialty is hitting 3s...*sigh*

Scott Brooks...my hatred for you was so low this year...and then you pull this...

Doug Collins coached Michael Jordan to the brink of title contention. He took him as far as he could. Then the Bulls got a coach that could take them to the next level. Has Scott Brooks taken this team as far as he can? Do we need to get a coach to take us to the next level. I think SVG will be available very soon. Thoughts?

FF...I like reading your stuff. And while I'm not a Brooks lover, I'm not a Brooks hater either. I don't think were as flexible as you think. We have no big on our roster who can catch the ball and play conventional low post offense. Perk, Nick, Narz, and Serge cannot do this...so Brooks really never has that option at his disposal. Early in the year, on another website, I suggested we trade Russ for Tony Parker before Russ had signed his extension. Of course, I didn't know at that time Parker was going to have a career season. To me--if you flip flopped Russ for Tony Parker...all this angst directed towards Brooks would be muted in a hurry. Not a diss towards Russ or any endorsement of the ESPN ferret Bayless, but rather my observation on how the gradual evolution of Russ is still not a finished product. Your point on Derek Fisher..I completely agree with. It makes no sense. By my count, Derek is our tenth best player. Your tenth best player should never get 25 minutes unless he's on fire. I can't defend Brooks on this.

This flexibility is currently a very BAD thing for us. Its allowing Coach Brooks to find ways to keep Ibaka on the bench for the majority of the game. If we want to make it to the the NBA Finals we have to have Ibaka's ability to erase layups, and make people think twice about shooting when they driving in the lane.

@Jokazc Weems does alright at SG but loses badly against his counterpart at SF. He is a below average shooter / scorer who is pretty hot and cold and does not pass or rebound much. He will try to latch on in the NBA again and he might get another try somewhere. I wouldn't expect him to join the Thunder. Maybe if they trade Cook they might look at him for the minimum and for a small role. But I doubt it.

I would love SVG, and especially the fact that he would rough up the boys a bit. Its like he's the type of coach that would turn KD, and Russ from being real talented boys, into seasoned men while they're still in the young half of their 20's. I understand people saying "Brooks should be the one to see them through" but KD, and Russ are only 22 and 24 for so long.

I thought he WAS doing a great job, too. Now he's ruining our team. If you need wing D, bring in Sef. If you need a sharp shooter, bring in Cook. If you need rebounds and paint protection, bring in Ibaka. I am still searching for the reason you EVER play Fisher with Westbrook. He's at best the 8th best player on our team and should get minutes accordingly.

@FF_pickups Uhh no one really "coached" Michael Jordan. Doug Collins got fired because MJ wanted him gone (didn't like the coaching he was receiving), and Jackson came in and Jordan won 6 titles. Whether Phil is a great coach or whether he got lucky (twice) is debatable (I still think he's a great coach). And we haven't even played the playoffs yet. So unless you've found another Phil Jackson you should have typed: Has (Kevin Durant) taken this team as far as he can? Do we need to (release him) to take us to the next level. I think (no one) will be available very soon. Thoughts?

@FF_pickups Sorry . . . deleted to fix a typo and clarify what I was trying to say.

Well, five days ago Brooks was somewhere on the spectrum between adequate and hero/genius. With three tough losses (2 on the road against top-tier teams) by a total of 16 points, Brooks now is seen by some as hopelessly inadequate. The whole organization values "fit" among players and coaches. Like a puzzle, no matter how promising another piece might look, it just may not fit with what's already in place. It remains to be seen exactly how far Brooks can take this young team and I think he's earned the right to see it through.

Nah. Not SVG. You may have a valid point at some juncture in regards to Scott Brooks. It's tough being an NBA coach. These players are making so much money they don't have to listen. Now--if you told me Pop might be interested, or the Zenmaster is bored in Montana..... then let's talk. I mean--how do you see van Gundy taking this team to a higher level? Rick Carlisle would be a coach I'd be interested in if Scott Brooks vacated the job. I've always wondered how this team would look with Mo Cheeks as the head coach. I mean, c'mon..look at how the Zenmaster exited last year. He had the three idiots on his team...Bynum, Odom, and World Peace--and lost control of his team and himself in the Dallas series when he started physically abusing Gasol on the bench. Even the Zenmaster met his match.

Thanks Prez, the feelings are mutual. I don't disagree with anything that you said. Honestly, not one thing. But I think maybe you misinterpreted what I was saying. When I say, we can play big, I don't mean run our offense through the low post. We don't have that capability. What I meant was put out a lineup of two bigs, Durant, Sefolosha and Westbrook and although we aren't the biggest team in the league, we're bigger than most teams (especially at the 1, 2 and the 3).

Also, I think the tone of my post has a 'Fire Scott Brooks' to it but that isn't the message that I am trying to get across. My message is that if he doesn't figure it out this postseason then we need to consider cutting bait especially if there is a better option out there. Also, my message is more of a prediction that I don't think that he will figure it out. Obviously, I could be wrong and hope that I am. He's definitely played with matchups A LOT MORE this season than last. Last year, the rotations were set in stone unless a player caught fire. This season, he seems to be trying stuff, experimenting. I like that because I think if he does that eventually he'll get to know intimitately 'If I push this button then that will happen, if I push that button then this will happen' but I'm really disappointed in him since the Derek Fisher aquisition.

What did you think of his use of Thabo in the Dallas series last year? Did you think that Brooks exploited the weaknesses of Deshawn Stevenson?

Its hard for any coach to be able to make Dwight the kid and co actually play ball for them. I mean their starters would come off the bench for any elite team. It is safe to say that the Magic are no longer a elite team. The only reason they are as high as they are is because of SVG, and Howard. Its sad to know that team was just in the finals not even more then three years ago.

@HookemKD I used to watch the Bulls back when they made the change from pretender to contender. It has always seemed to me that the biggest thing Jackson did was to convince Jordan to do less and trust his team more.

My thoughts are that Phil Jackson wasn't getting outcoached on a nightly basis. He did the outcoaching. Sure, he had great pieces but he's not benching Gasol in crunchtime so he can play a decrepit veteran backup point guard. Ibaka is our 4th best player, that's fact. Fisher is our 9th best player.

I have mixed thoughts on whether Brooks is the right man for the job. At times i've seen a high school coach run plays i know that a couple NBA Players could easily run but Brooks X's, and O's lack so much, that come playoff time i'm still afraid teams will recognize the plays before they even happen again. Its one thing to have a lack of skill in playcalling (which is a important part of his job in the playoffs) but his roations at times are horrible, i mean down right terrible. Sometimes he lets loyalty get the best of him, i mean when Russ and KD are cold but Harden is burning it up, why in earth does he continue to go away from Harden. I understand the whole "he's growing with the team concept,) But Face it, we got soo deep into the playoffs DESPITE Brooks. Stop saying he took us to the confrence finals, stop saying he helped us win the division title. He didn't, KD, Russ and Crew did. I'm not saying toss him to the side. Heck he can even be the head coach, but get him an assistant thats actually help him run a good offense, or a real good defensive assistant coach that'll help make us a better defense team. I know Ron Adams is a 1 in ever 1000 assistant coach, but theres gotta be a few out there that must be oustanding.

I'd take every coach you named ahead of SVG, I totally agree with you there. I think Brooks is a master of dealing with young players and egos, too. What I think he's well below average at is in game adjustments and strategies. You aren't going to win in a 7 game series with the Spurs when Popovich is playing chess and Brooks is playing checkers.

I'm not going to close my eyes and blindly agree with the coach. You have to tell me not just 'follow blindly', you have to tell me WHY PLAYING FISHER 24 MPG IS BETTER THAN PLAYING IBAKA, SEFOLOSHA OR COOK those minutes. All are vastly more productive players. Why?

You are being completely results oriented. I am asking you to justify playing DFish for more mpg than Ibaka, Cook or Sefolosha. Explain why he thinks that's the right decision. I complained about it after the Heat game, now I'm getting a little louder.

You didn't answer the question though. Did you feel like Scott Brooks deployments of Sefolosha and Perkins in the Dallas series was poor? I felt that way. Although there is no doubt that Westbrook didn't play a perfect series, when you look at the +/- of Sefolosha and Perkins in that series and throughout the playoffs last year, It was completely obvious that they needed to be deployed differently and yet to the very end, Brooks never changed. In fact, Brooks is still deploying those two the EXACT same way this year. i.e. he still hasn't learned from his mistakes. If he hasn't learned yet, we've got to begin to come to grips with the fact that he's never going to.

@FF_pickups I honestly didn't feel any of that was the determinant in the series. I just thought Dallas was the better, more veteran/ more heady team, and they caught fire after that big win in their series against Portland and it just kept building. I thought Russell's inability to play the point with poise in the last six minutes of those games was the storyline.

@El Prez But 1 trip to the finals is not that impressive. Still that is equal to Carlisle and Karl / Adelman only have 2 in more than twice the time. Rivers has 2 in a bit more time than Stan. It is very hard to get to the finals.

@El Prez I would disagree with your number 3. I think Carlisle and SVG go above Karl. And I wouldn't put any college coach over SVG. There's a big difference being god of a college team versus being an NBA coach.

Are you kidding me i would die if we were able to convince JVG to come and coach. I mean i can't imagine what better coach then him. A guy who actually knows how to get a team to run an officient offense, and a brick wall of a defense.

I think your statements would be more justified if we weren't 40-15. Either Brooks is coaching to win games or our players are playing to win them, and either way it supports the fact that for the moment we're fine with Brooks.

The coach's job is to manage rotations, matchups and draw up offensive plays. Brooks is defficient in these categories. The question is can we get a coach who is better at managing rotations, matchups and drawing up offensive plays. I think that we can.

So it was KD, Russ, and crew that won the division title, but it's all Brooks' fault they're coming up short these last 3 games? It appears to me that KD, Russ, and James have learned to rely on their talent a little TOO much and often blow off the play they're supposed to run. Collison has kinda hinted at this in interviews.

@FF_pickups@ElMexiThunder We're all perplexed/dismayed (or whatever euphemism you want to put for how we really feel) at Fisher's playing time--especially at the expense of Sefolosha, Cook, Ivey, and/or Ibaka. Wish I had the answer, but I don't have any ideas beyond what's already been said earlier in the thread.

I'm not so sure we're "all grown up" yet and I just don't see the coaching piece as easily interchangeable as you do.

I think you brought up a fantastic point that I want to piggyback on. You said 'he's growing with the team' concept. And this might be why we need to go away from Brooks. Our team doesn't need to grow anymore! They're all grown up, now we need a jockey who's going to ride this team across the finish line. Unless Scott Brooks can change, we need a better X's and O's guy starting ASAP.

It was kinda obvious Collison would played good d against Zac, he HAS/HAD the entire season, if i remember correctly this board would erupt because he WOULDN"T play Collison on ZBO, and Dirk, and tried Ibaka too much on games. If anything i hated the Collison/Perkins when against the Mavs because it was obvious Chandler was running circles around KP. I mean i understand not playing to match the other team but danm it when your in a series you gotta do whatever it is to make sure you match up well, and if that meant Collison starting on ZBO, or Dirk then so be it. Besides, that series could have easily gone 1-3. Doug Collins also DID not outcoach Pop. The Spurs honestly did not have on player on their roster who could really contain ZBO. So at times, i understand Collison has degressed a bit this year, but man that guys is just a glue guy plain and simple, and without him we wouldn't have gotten passed Memphis. Did you forget Brooks still tried to play Ibaka a majority of the time against ZBo the first 3 games? It wasn't until it was obvious Collison was the best match up that he changed it.

Now wait a minute. Lionell Hollins out coached Pop last year when the Grizzlies eliminated the Spurs. Scott Brooks then out coached Lionell Hollins as the Thunder eliminated the Grizzlies..and and as I recall some adjustments were made throughout that series in relation to Randolph. I think you're knee jerking a bit. But I completely agree with you in regards to Derek's role..it vexes me.

@FF_pickups@ThunderChick2010 I'm not saying I agree...but the only reason I can come up with for playing Fisher along with KD, Russ, Harden, and Collison is that it is probably the most amount of basketball IQ we can put on the floor at one time. Still...if it were me...I would have played Ibaka (because he was blocking everything in sight, plus hit the occasional outside jumper) in place of Collison and Daequan (because he can actually hit the 3) in place of Fish.